I decided to reorganize my log, and moving it to a new thread is the first step of that. The latest additions were the Slazenger Black Panther, the Fischer Pro Classic 90 and the Donnay Pro Cynetic 12 Mid.

Thanks for the list. I am surprised that flex rating of the Spectrum Comp is that high since it feels pretty flexible or comfortable to me.

Click to expand...

It does feel pretty comfortable, which indicates that there's more to a racquet's feel than the RDC numbers might suggest... It has been noted before that the RDC machine only measures flex at one point, which may account for some differences between numbers and feel. At least that's the way I understand it.

Apart from the Estusa I haven't played with any of the racquets I just measured. I'm especially eager to try out the F295, since I've had a NOS one for ages that I never dared to string up...

Click to expand...

Ciao Dino,

i discovered that my Rossi F 395 it's basically the same frame as the 295, it is the heavier version.same flex, same head shape( i think that the headsize was a 87 sq.in.), and same paint job.Actually, my F 395 weights 372 grams, balance 32,4 cm,flex 56, swingweight 363.

i discovered that my Rossi F 395 it's basically the same frame as the 295, it is the heavier version.same flex, same head shape( i think that the headsize was a 87 sq.in.), and same paint job.Actually, my F 395 weights 372 grams, balance 32,4 cm,flex 56, swingweight 363.

Click to expand...

The F395 is the larger head size version of the F295. Back in those days Rossignol offered the racquets in different weights. I had a F295 that was that was labled L and weighed 370g strung and one that was a SL that was much lighter. Unfortunately I don't have them anymore.

The F395 is the larger head size version of the F295. Back in those days Rossignol offered the racquets in different weights. I had a F295 that was that was labled L and weighed 370g strung and one that was a SL that was much lighter. Unfortunately I don't have them anymore.

We're having a debate in the stringing machine forum here at TT concerning swingweight. Others have reported that any weight added to a frame, below the pivot point will result in a decrease in SW... which is physically impossible. I'd like to verify it one more time on a different machine to determine if this is an idiosyncrasy of the RDC machine.

My question is this: The next time you have a racquet on the RDC machine, after determining the swingweight, would you attach/add an additional 10-20 grams of weight as close to the butt cap as you can and then re-run the swingweight test? The weight can be taped to the end or added inside the buttcap.

If you can do this,

I'd like to know the following:

Racquet model

Length

Weight

Balance

Swingweight (stock)

Swingweight (with added weight)

Amount of extra weight added to the buttcap

Approximate distance weight is added from the pivot point of the RDC machine (should be 8-9 cm, I believe)

Dino Lagaffe - I haven't said it before, but thanks for starting this thread and continuing to update the info.

Click to expand...

Thanks, I feel what makes TT worthwile are the contributions the members make, and this is mine... I haven't really gone after Wilsons in general when I've looked for racquets, but if I ever get my hands on an Ultra II I'll be sure to let you know the specs.

Hey Dino! Would you be so kind as to post-up some photos of the Snauwaert Miami, Donnay Diamant, Donnay Diamant II, and the Sanuwaert MCE105.64GC.

Thank You in advance.

Click to expand...

Snauwaert pictures will come later.

About the Donnay Diamant, the Roman numerals I and II simply denote racquet 1 and 2, not different models. Sorry for the confusion, I'll change to a different system in the log later. There were two models though, a wooden one that I believe Virginia has posted about and the graphite one proracketeer has posted in the Donnay Code Book thread: